DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 06/04/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4, 6-11, 13-14 & 28-32 remain pending in the application. Claim 3, 5 & 12 has been cancelled. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the objections and rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 04/09/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 4, 6-11, 13-14 & 28-32 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The claim amendments changed the scope of the claimed invention. See new grounds for rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6-10, 13-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson et al. (US 20120185021) herein referred to as Johnson in view Scott et al. (US 20190240067) herein referred to as Scott.
Regarding Claim 1, Johnson discloses a medical pad for exchanging thermal energy between a targeted temperature management (TTM) fluid and a patient (Figure 2 & Figure 10B), the medical pad comprising: a fluid containing layer for containing the TTM fluid (Figure 2, 34), the fluid containing layer configured for circulating the TTM fluid within the fluid containing layer (Paragraph [0039]; wherein layer 34 is in communication with inlet and outlet ports circulating the fluid); a patient contact surface to facilitate thermal energy exchange with the patient (Figure 4, 12) the patient contact surface substantially aligned over the fluid containing layer (Figure 4; wherein patient contact surface 12 is aligned over fluid contacting layer 34); a central trunk structure (See annotated Figure 8 below), wherein the patient contact surface is disposed at least on part of the central trunk structure (Figure 2, 60); and at least two wings branching from the central trunk structure (Figure 8, 128 & 130), wherein the fluid containing layer does not extend within the respective edge section (See annotated Figure 8 below) wherein the at least two wings are configured to be wrapped around a portion of a body of the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the winged portions wrap around the body). However, Johnson does not explicitly disclose trimmed in a respective edge section of a respective wing by tearing along tear-lines comprising pre-formed perforations extending from a first side of the respective wing to a second opposing side of the respective wing to reduce a size of the medical pad and the reducing the size of the medical pad does not reduce an area of the patient contact surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
759
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. Johnson also discloses wherein: the at least two wings comprise a plurality of pairs of wings (See annotated Figure 2), each pair of wings comprises two wings on opposite sides of the central trunk structure (See annotated Figure 2), and each pair of wings is configured to be wrapped around the portion of the body of the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the wings wrap around a patient).
PNG
media_image2.png
307
665
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. Johnson also discloses wherein the portion of the body of the patient comprises a leg of the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the lower half of the pad is wrapped around the patient’s leg)
Regarding claim 8, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. Johnson also discloses wherein the portion of the body of the patient comprises a torso of the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the upper half of the pad is wrapped around the hip of the patient and the hip is considered to be a part of a torso).
Regarding claim 9, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. Johnson also discloses wherein the central trunk structure is configured to be positioned beneath the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the first two wings and the central truck structure is beneath the patient and therefore not visible), and the at least two wings are configured to be wrapped around to a front of the portion of the body of the patient (Figure 10B; wherein the second two wings are wrapped around to the front of the patient and visible).
Regarding claim 10, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. Johnson also discloses wherein the at least two wings are configured to be fastened together via a strap (Figure 10B, 22 & 24).
Regarding claim 13, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 10. Johnson also discloses wherein the strap is attached or fixed to a first wing of the at least two wings (Figure 10B, 22 & 24).
Regarding claim 14, Johnson discloses a medical pad for exchanging thermal energy between a targeted temperature management (TTM) fluid and a patient (Figure 2 & Figure 10B), the medical pad comprising: a fluid containing layer for containing the TTM fluid (Figure 2, 34), the fluid containing layer configured for circulating the TTM fluid within the fluid containing layer (Paragraph [0039]; wherein layer 34 is in communication with inlet and outlet ports circulating the fluid); a patient contact surface to facilitate thermal energy exchange with the patient (Figure 4, 12) the patient contact surface substantially aligned over the fluid containing layer (Figure 4; wherein patient contact surface 12 is aligned over fluid contacting layer 34); wings branching from a central trunk structure (see annotated Figure 2 below); wherein the fluid containing layer does not extend within the respective edge section (See annotated Figure 8 below). However, Johnson does not explicitly disclose trimmed in a respective edge section of a respective wing by tearing along tear-lines comprising pre-formed perforations extending from a first side of the respective wing to a second opposing side of the respective wing to reduce a size of the medical pad and the reducing the size of the medical pad does not reduce an area of the patient contact surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
759
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson and Scott in further view of Cassidy et al. (US 20110172750) herein referred to as Cassidy.
Regarding claim 4, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad of claim 1. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly discloses wherein: the medical pad further comprises a conformable, thermally conductive hydrogel layer and the hydrogel layer is configured to be trimmed
Cassidy discloses a medical pad (Figure 1, 100) wherein: the medical pad further comprises a conformable, thermally conductive hydrogel layer (Paragraph [0027-0028]), the hydrogel layer extends to the respective edge section (Figure 2A, 230), and the hydrogel layer is configured to be trimmed (Paragraph [0056]; wherein the whole pad is configured to be trimmed). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the medical pad taught by Johnson in view of Cassidy to allow for hydrogel layer that is configured to be trimmed as taught by Cassidy. The motivation being hydrogels contain a high water content, and are thereby generally thermally conductive (Cassidy, Paragraph [0028]).
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson and Scott in further view of Whitely (US 20150173942) herein referred to as Whitely.
Regarding claim 11, Johnson in view of Scott discloses the medical pad according to claim 10. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly disclose wherein the strap is connected to the at least two wings via hook and loop fasteners, a snap, a button, a zipper, or a clasp.
Whitely discloses a pad for thermal therapy (Figure 6, 70) wherein the strap is connected to the at least two wings (Figure 6, 90; wherein there are two wings 90 on each end of the pad) via hook and loop fasteners (Paragraph [0051]; wherein the example uses a hook and loop fastener but other fasteners can be used such as buttons, clips, buckles and the like). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified the medical pad taught by Johnson in view of Scott to include the strap taught by Whitely. The motivation being the thermotherapeutic pad and strap can be wrapped around a person's body part in a number of different ways (Whitely, Paragraph [0051]).
Claim 28-32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson and Scott in further view of CREIGHTON et al. (US 20100312160) herein referred to as Creighton.
Regarding Claim 28, Johnson in view of Scott disclosed the medical pad of claim 1. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly disclose wherein the visual markings have a color distinct from that of the medical pad.
Creighton discloses a trimmable medical pad (Figure 3B) wherein the visual markings have a color distinct from that of the medical pad (Paragraph [0118]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the visual marking taught by Johnson in view of Scott to be different colors as taught by Creighton. The motivation being to make the marking distinguishable (Creighton, Paragraph [0118]).
Regarding claim 29, Johnson in view of Scott disclosed the medical pad of claim 1. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly disclose wherein the visual markings include raised material, the visual markings further defining sections of the medical pad physically.
Creighton discloses a trimmable medical pad (Figure 3B) wherein the visual markings include raised material (Paragraph [0116]; wherein markings are additional padding added to the pad therefore would be raised from the low profile padded areas), the visual markings further defining sections of the medical pad physically (Paragraph [0116]; wherein markings are additional padding added to the pad therefore would be raised from the low profile padded areas). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the visual marking taught by Johnson in view of Scott to be different colors as taught by Creighton. The motivation being to make the marking distinguishable (Creighton, Paragraph [0118]).
Regarding claim 30, Johnson and Scott in further view of Creighton discloses the medical pad of claim 29. Creighton also discloses wherein the raised material being an additional amount of material makes trimming the size of the medical pad more difficult at the raised material than closer to an outer edge of the medical pad (Paragraph [0116]; wherein markings are additional padding added to the pad therefore would be raised from the low profile padded areas wherein the areas with more padding will be more difficult to cut). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the visual marking taught by Johnson in view of Scott to be different colors as taught by Creighton. The motivation being to make the marking distinguishable (Creighton, Paragraph [0118]).
Regarding claim 31, Johnson in view of Scott disclosed the medical pad of claim 1. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly disclose wherein the visual markings are reflective.
Creighton discloses a trimmable medical pad (Figure 3B) wherein the visual markings are reflective (Paragraph [0118]; wherein the ink used on the indicia and markings would be fluorescent ink such that a black light is needed to see the trim marks and without it the indicia and markings are not visible to the patient therefore is seen as reflective) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the visual marking taught by Johnson in view of Scott to be different colors as taught by Creighton. The motivation being to make the marking distinguishable (Creighton, Paragraph [0118]).
Regarding claim 32, Johnson in view of Scott disclosed the medical pad of claim 1. However, Johnson in view of Scott does not explicitly disclose wherein the visual markings are accompanied by text indicating the visual markings serve as borders between the sections of the medical pad for trimming and those that should not be trimmed.
Creighton discloses a trimmable medical pad (Figure 3B) wherein the visual markings are accompanied by text indicating the visual markings serve as borders between the sections of the medical pad for trimming and those that should not be trimmed (Paragraph [0118]; wherein labels and indica which are seen as text help identify or determine which line the garment should be trimmed in order to provide the proper fit). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the visual marking taught by Johnson in view of Scott to be different colors as taught by Creighton. The motivation being to make the marking distinguishable (Creighton, Paragraph [0118]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA M PAPE whose telephone number is (703)756-5947. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joanne Rodden can be reached at 303-297-4276. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ALYSSA M. PAPE
Examiner
Art Unit 3794
/JOANNE M RODDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights